Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2012

Controversial win, keep an eye on vandalism

As the Azerbaijani win tonight was quite controversial with all going on with Armenia etc etc. I think it would be good if we all together keep on the look out for vandalism on this Eurovision 2012 article from now on. Already after an hour there is quite heavy IP vandalism. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

You can see evidence already beneath this comment of the troubles ahead of pro-armenia and pro-azerbaijan.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:48, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Armenia–Azerbaijan relations in the Eurovision Song Contest

This headline is one-sided propaganda. If you actually visit the main article here , you will see there is controversy from both sides. Yet this headline only targets Azerbaijan. Also some of the sources are not neutral. This headline simply is not Wikipedia material and must be adjusted accordingly.Neftchi (talk) 00:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

We have had this discussion already on the other articles talk page and it was established as a good source. BUT if you can find a better source and provide a better sentence then please do. But just dont delete it,. thanks--BabbaQ (talk) 00:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

What other talk page, please show us the link. Neftchi (talk) 00:36, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Also this source does not mention that "Armenians are not allowed entrance to Azerbaijan". In fact Armenian journalists and diplomats have entered Azerbaijan on many occasions.Neftchi (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I have now removed the areas concerning these claims of yours. Im not having another senseless argument with someone. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:40, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Also journalists and diplomats are not the same as an average Armenian citizen.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

If people want they can read about the problems between Azerbaijan and Armenian in Eurovision in the main article. A link is provided for the readers. This dispute between the countries should not be further expanded as it is already more than the actual subject of the article. Neftchi (talk) 00:42, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Armenian diplomats and journalists are citizens of Armenia too. Please dont be discriminating. Neftchi (talk) 00:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

As I said im not getting into a senseless discussion over pro-armenia or pro-azerbaijan. sorry.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

However the summary of the issues ahead are enough and should not be expand further for now I agree. It is a good summary of the events so far. But it is a true issue with Armenia in the Eurovision next year no one can deny that. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

This section must be removed as it is very biased and creates problem for the contest.--NovaSkola (talk) 01:20, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Stop immediatly to remove information from this article. Yes it is controversial but cjust because it is controversial doesnt mean it should be removed. It can be discussed further. But per fact it is a problem ahead which mean even security risk for the Armenian delegation next year. I see you have an interest in Azerbaijani articles. You might be from Azerbaijan I dont know, but its not OK to remove information just because you dont agree with it on a nationlistic pointview. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Past controversies involving Azerbaijan shouldn't be brought up again in this article unless there are clear sources making them an issue for 2012. The overall premise of the section that the controversies "may affect" Azerbaijan's ability to host the contest, and while that may be true, it is still original research without sources explicitly giving that view. So removal was probably right for the time being. CT Cooper · talk 10:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

OK. Remove it for now. When it becomes a problem then we return it. Good to get a second non-bias opinion. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

The "See also" mention is good enough for now I guess to.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I've actually removed that link too, for essentially the same reasons CT Cooper summed up quite well. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:10, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Austria not yet confirmed

Austria's participation in 2012 is not yet confirmed. The cited newspaper article does not tell anything about next year. It's all about this year's exitement (or lack thereof). --62.167.137.3 (talk) 08:28, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it seems like a confirmation of participation: "Deswegen wird auch nächstes Jahr wieder ein heimischer Künstler antreten. " --Christian140 (talk) 14:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Czech Republic didn't confirm return

There will be discussion in Czech Republic, but nobody confirmed their return. (78.136.162.196 (talk) 20:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC))

I agree. Source linked says that it's from some "direct source", but can't say who is that source. Therefore I find this information unreliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.173.20.32 (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely. That is why I deleted it. I hope it sticks like that. Tony0106 (talk) 16:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

norway will paricipate but might drop their selection

according to what i have read their song have already been selected internally. the norwegian selection have also been corrupted to the point where the participant is always selected from the third semi final. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk) 13:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I've also heard that from next year broadcasters must use a national selection. But both of these statements are as of now are a mystery. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 21:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC) norway will at least participate. people are however still discussing how the national final will be.

interwiki

please add georgian interwiki ka:ევროვიზიის სიმღერის კონკურსი 2012--David1010 (talk) 11:13, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Poland

Poland may retire next year due to poor performance and financial problems of the public broadcaster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.125.217.140 (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

This claim has been repeatedly added to the article, and removed because of a lack of sourcing. Anyone is free to re-add it if they can give some reliable sources. CT Cooper · talk 16:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

In Swedish wikipedia page there are references, I think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.125.217.140 (talk) 19:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The Swedish version does not give a source, and is tagged: [källa behövs] = [citation needed]. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 21:44, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

A spokesperson of TVP has confirmed in an e-mail sent to me that Poland will most definitely take part in ESC 2012. Unfortunately, this is no valid source and, therefore, I feel it should not be added to the article.--130.226.70.114 (talk) 08:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

If you remove your name from the email, and provide translation, you should post the email here to verify your claim doktorb _words^deeds 17:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

France and Belarus confirmed

You should add these two countries as confirmed.

Source for France: http://www.eurovision-fr.net/news/index.php?page=1&num=#1127. The paragraph: "Toujours sur toutelatele.com Pierre Sled (Directeur des programmes qui avait fait le déplacement à Düsseldorf) déclare que la France continuera de participer à l'Eurovision : bla bla bla". These sites are reliable. Source for Belarus: http://dziennik-eurowizyjny.blog.pl (in Polish). The article: Białoruś i Finlandia gotowe na ESC (Belarus and Finland confirms participation in ESC 2012). Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.163.71.78 (talk) 18:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

you can add norway as well. norway have only withdrawn once and that was together with other countries due to 4 countries winning. in 2002 they were relegated and wasnt allowed to participate otherwise they would. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk)

Internal selections not allowed from 2012 onwards

From 2012 onwards, entirely internal selections will no longer be allowed. Sietse Bakker, Executive Supervisor of the Junior Eurovision Song Contest and Event Supervisor of the Eurovision Song Contest, confirmed this in an interview with Belgian fansite Eurosong.be. Performers may still be chosen internally, but the songs themselves must be chosen by means of a public vote. EBU bevestigt: ‘Volgend jaar publieke selectie verplicht --130.226.70.114 (talk) 10:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Baku

I think saying it is in Baku, is a bit premature. The two sources given are newspapers (Russian newspapers, but if I'll trust they say Baku), but this is obviously based only on the assumption that in all likeliness this will be the venue. No reliable source has confirmed the venue (reliable in this case being only the host broadcaster or the EBU). While, given the Armenia issue, it could arise that it will not take place in Azerbaijan at all, given the recent rarity of another broadcaster hosting the event, I think assuming it will be Azerbaijan is an acceptably reliable statement. I agree, in all likeliness it will also be in Baku (especially since the venues under consideration are all there), but I don't think there is sufficient information to confirm this. - 46.7.141.61 (talk) 21:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

how you are such a source of authoritative and influential Russian newspaper - Rossijskoj Gazety [1]?--analitic114 (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

There is also this source cited as well, which appears to be a bit closer to home, though it appears to be behind some sort of pay wall. I do think Wikipedia was jumping the gun by treating a claim in a Russian newspaper, even it is reliable on Wikipedia's standards, as an absolute confirmation that the contest will be held in Baku. While I will not remove the content as it stands, a source from the EBU or the broadcaster would be more helpful. At the end of the day, it is not a race, and being cautious is not a problem. CT Cooper · talk 23:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree, during first days after ESC 2010 some media reported that ESC 2011 would take placein Berlin, just because it's capital of Germany. Same as you, I'm not sure it's gonna be in Azerbaijan at all. Let's wait for EBU statement, we should have it in less than one month. Meanwhile, I would change it to "It's likely to be held in Baku, Azerbaijan, following Azerbaijan's win in the 2011 Contest with Eldar & Nigar's song "Running Scared""... Statements of Azebaijan authorities are irrelevant until EBU confirms it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.173.20.32 (talk)

Turkey

The reference link doesn't provide any confirmation for Turkish entry. The link is all about a singer/song writer nominates himself for 2012. --85.98.189.130 (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Portugal

Due to international financial rescue, and because RTP should be privatised till the end of 2011, Portugal won't have a public Tv broadcaster and so there is a very high probability of definitive withdrawl — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.129.13.226 (talk) 00:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

According to Today.az, Portugal will skip the 2012 contest. One more country to skip the "Eurovision 2012" --Ahmetyal 11:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Armenia

Armenia is back in the possible withdrawal list and now has two citations, one is the Russian version of Eurasianet.org's article 'Armenia: Yerevan Grapples with Eurovision Dilemma', which is an article highlighting the political dilema of Armenia participating, but not mentioning anything about them withdrawing, and the other is Eurovisionary. This article, on a site which is essentially a fan site, makes two statements that say that officials have "mentioned" that they'll possibly withdraw and one of them is in the third person. There's no actual official statement quoted by any Armenian official on the subject. On this basis would anyone else agree that these sources be deemed inappropriate and the entry removed until a better source can be found? ~~ Peteb16 (talk)

it doesnt exactly seem reliable so i say that it should be removed until a better source have been found.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk)

I am generally in agreement with these concerns. The first source talks about the difficulty of participating, and doesn't talk about "possible withdrawal" (if anything, on my reading it leans towards the view that Armenia will get over any possible difficulties), so an argument could be made that using this source is original research. On the EuroVisionary source, this website hasn't been formally scrutinised on its reliability, but I would say at best that it is semi-reliable. Furthermore, it would be more helpful to readers if a brief description of why these countries are considering withdrawal was added. CT Cooper · talk 17:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Wrong participant

German participant in ESC2011 is not Christy Portelli. Germany has not decided yet.

Svilka555 (talk) 16:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. This appears to have been fixed now. CT Cooper · talk 19:16, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

United Kingdom confirm 2012 participation

According to the BBC's Eurovision page, they have confirmed their participation for Baku 2012, in a short but to the point line which reads "We're closing the News Blog at midday on Wednesday 22nd June - although you'll be able to read all of the posts that have already been made. See you all in 2012!" http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/eurovision/ 80.192.226.205 (talk) 09:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

It could be used, but it is not ideal, as something more specific would be better. Normally blogs are not acceptable as sources either, but given that this one is an official blog of the BBC, this is not an issue. CT Cooper · talk 09:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that a bit contradictory then? Last year Wikipedia added the UK as confirmed the minute that the BBC put in the phrase "See you all in 2011!" on their main Eurovision page. This year they have the same comment put but placed it on their news section, and it doesn't get included as confirmed for 2012? Hmmm horses for courses I guess. 80.192.226.205 (talk) 18:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a collaborative project which is full of contradictions. I did say "it could be used" - I can't remember what I said, if anything, last year - I probably either ignored it or didn't notice it. In any case, another editor can add it if they wish, and I won't revert, since it almost certainly means the UK will be back in 2012, however it is still very vague and something more solid would be better. It is early days yet, and there is no race to add countries as confirmed. CT Cooper · talk 19:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

As much as I understand that it isn't a race to add countries as confirmed. Is it not also true that Wikipedia like to pride themselves on maintaining any article to its truest form as possible? And as you pointed that the BBC Eurovision page is a reliable source, and also the fact that last year a similar link from the BBC's own page was used to confirm the UK's participation in 2011 when they (BBC) used the phrase "See you all in 2011". Then shouldn't it be the case that this be repeated again, now that the BBC have used the same phrase "See you all in 2012"? I do recall last year that the link for "See you all in 2011" was used as a source of confirmation; and then once further details about Blue came out, then the link was altered. 80.192.226.205 (talk) 13:39, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

It is also showing on the BBC Eurovision's Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/BBCEurovision) that they will be reopening the page in 2012. Again another sign that the UK ARE taking part in 2012. Why would the BBC inform fans that they will "see us all in 2012" and "the facebook page reopens in 2012" if they have no intentions of participating? 80.192.226.205 (talk) 13:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Verifiability is more important than truth. The issue here is the no original research policy states that advancing a position not explicitly stated in the sources is not permitted. This means that in order to source the claim that the UK will return in 2012 a reliable source needs to explicitly state that the UK will participate in 2012. "See you all in 2012" isn't doing this, and interpreting or inferring it to mean the UK will participate in 2012 is a form of original research. This is what I meant by "something more specific would be better". However, given that it is almost certain that the UK will participate next year, with nothing saying otherwise, use of that source may be "tolerated", though for policy reasons, I do not endorse its use. CT Cooper · talk 16:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Spelling

Can someone with editing rights please change the spelling of the word "privatisation", etc. in the main article, because they have been spelt with the letter "z" and this is the American spelling. We should really put the British spelling because this is a European contest! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.85.235 (talk) 22:10, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

-ize endings are Americanisms only to the extent that US spelling is standardised to -ize for most words; in British English -ize is acceptable alongside -ise. See Oxford spelling and this article. Per the spirit of WP:ENGVAR, spelling changes should be kept to a minimum. CT Cooper · talk 23:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Greenland

I think that Greenland should be purple too,as part of Denmark. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.12.157.139 (talk) 18:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC) that would be like putting australia as part of england. both countries have their own rule but share monarchs with other countries.

Armenia and Czech Republic "confirmed" by unreliable sources.

• ARMENIA - I think we should wait for a statement from the official broadcaster. Those news appearently come from an Azerbaijani news agency but it only speculates it doesn't mention ARMTV anywhere. And logically speaking, it is hard to believe that an Azerbaijani news agency would be the first to talk about an Armenian participation over their official broadcaster or even the EBU.

• CZECH REPUBLIC - If the Czech Republic were to return eurovision.tv would be the first to report that as they are always on track with the returning countries - as it happened to Italy last year - and once again the official confirmation seems to come from a Slovakian-based ESC-fan web page. Once again there is no official statement from ČT while the other source comes from a blog.

C'mon guys those are unrealiable sources. That is why I decided to remove them. My suggestion is to stick with sources coming from the Official Participating Broadcasters, the EBU, or other longtime ESC-fan based websites such as ESCToday.com or eurovision-spain.com, for instance. Tony0106 (talk) 00:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

maybe kosovo will participate

they certainly participated in eurovision young dancers. though it is only speculation, the fact remains that they did participate in eurovision young dancers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

There participation in EYD is certainly an interesting development, however we will need solid sourcing before anything can be added to this article - particularly with Kosovo, as historically any mention of them Eurovision articles has caused conflict between editors. CT Cooper · talk 20:04, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

According to the official EBU website, active membership of EBU requires membership of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Since countries with limited recognition are ineligible for ITU membership, Kosovo will be able to participate in the ESC only when the country is fully recognised.--130.226.70.114 (talk) 08:04, 7 July 2011 (UTC) it is still a while until next year so you shouldnt rule them out completely.

what happens to the big 5?

it should be added to the article wether the system remains or gets altered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk) 18:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Nothing will happen to the big five; the voting window was changed from allowing voting to occur during and after the performances as opposed to just after them as was from 1997-2009. — Ines(talk) 18:38, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I think focusing on what changes is best. If the article listed each year what didn't change, we would end up with many long and repetitive sections. CT Cooper · talk 19:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Also need to point out, four of the Big 5 have yet to officially confirm their participation. ~~ Peteb16 (talk) 19:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

More to withdraw

The Serbian version of this page has Spain, San Marino, and Greece, as withdrawing from 2012 doktorb _words^deeds 12:31, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

None of them have any sources — Ines(talk) 13:33, 10 July 2011 (UTC)